Scurrilous attack on Madras HC judges

CHENNAI, JUN 30: Advocate General for Tamil Nadu Vijay Narayan has sent a show cause notice to disqualified MLA Thanga Tamilselvan in a contempt petition moved against him for his scurrilous attack on judges of the Madras High Court.
As per the scheme of Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the consent of the Advocate General is required to initiate proceedings for criminal contempt of court. After issuing notice to the alleged contemnor (in this case, Tamilselvan), the AG is required to hear both sides before deciding to accord his consent or deny permission for initiating contempt proceedings before the Court.
Tamilselvan is one of the 18 disqualified AIADMK MLAs whose fate hangs in the balance, awaiting the verdict to be pronounced by Justice M Sathyanarayanan, the third judge called on to decide on the validity of the disqualification.
Justice Sathyanarayanan was appointed by the Supreme Court on Monday to decide the case after a Bench of Chief Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice M Sundar were unable to reach a consensus.
Whereas Chief Justice Indira Banerjee found no scope for interfering with the speaker’s decision to disqualify the MLAs, Justice M Sundar concluded that the disqualification was liable to be set aside.
Lamenting the unfavourable ruling rendered by Chief Justice Banerjee, Tamilselvan is said to have made certain adverse remarks against the judiciary through media channels.
The petition filed by Advocate V Srimathi makes reference to two interviews given by Tamilsevan to Thanthi TV on June 23 and 24. As per the petition, the derogatory statements made by Tamilselvan include (loosely translated) that “he has lost confidence in the judiciary” and further that, “it’s not a judgment that was given but was purchased.”
The petitioner goes on to point out that Tamilselvan has even accused the Chief Justice and other judges of the Madras High Court of having conspired with the government. As stated in the petition,
“‘He has accused the Chief Justice of the High Court and the other judges have conspired with the State and the Central government and are pawns in the hands of both the government and delivery of the judgement in the case was deliberately delayed in order to favour certain individuals.
He has also imputed in his interview that the State government was aware of the order much prior to the date on which it was passed. In the later interview he has questioned the integrity and the independence of the judiciary of this Honourable Court and has made a scurrilous attack on the Chief Justice of the Madras High court. [sic]”
Before the Supreme Court appointed Justice Sathyanarayanan as the tie-breaker judge, Chief Justice Banerjee had left it to Justice HG Ramesh (the seniormost judge after her) to appoint a third judge to decide the case.
Justice Ramesh in turn tasked Justice S Vimala with hearing the matter. As per Advocate Srimathi’s observations, even Justice Vimala was not spared by Tamilselvan in his diatribe.